[dmz]

As I posted on a similar thread earlier, the irony of this article is that in order to refute the traditional December birthday, the scientists have acknowledged the existence of an actual historical Jesus Christ (i.e. JESUS WAS BORN . . . . .) Non-believers hoist once again upon their own petard.

You are confusing 2 issues. The historical nature of Jesus Christ, and his being the Son of God. I can easily believe the first without believing the 2nd. The petard you speak of must be in your own eye to not see that distinction.

[stripes1776]

You are confusing 2 issues. The historical nature of Jesus Christ, and his being the Son of God. I can easily believe the first without believing the 2nd. The petard you speak of must be in your own eye to not see that distinction.

Your reasoning is flawed. If you believe in the historical nature of Jesus Christ, you necessarily believe he is the Son of God. On the other had you can believe in the historical nature of Jesus of Nazareth and believe he was only a man.